Re: Reforming the NM process
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Gustavo Franco wrote:
> I strongly disagree that 2.3 is a long-term thing. It should be
> started years ago, but it isn't too late yet. We should push it with a
> transition plan in mind (e.g: what we're going to do with the people
> that is already waiting for DAM?), but the transition couldn't require
> (more) work before applying, IMHO. We should block not really
> interested people giving less privileges for those who do less as you
> pointed out and be good with MIA and its procedures. I step in to help
> writing a 1-year transition plan and contact the people that needs to
> accept/reject some points, if you want.
I don't understand what you have written. Can you reformulate it ?
A long term plan can happen shortly if someone does it, but the change
mentionned in 2.3 involve many people and as thus will required a great
deal of coordination work.
That's why Mark called it "long term" IMO. But with Anthony's recent blog post,
I'm sure we'll start going into this direction.
http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/2006/04/12#2006-04-11-maintainers
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Reply to: